Skip to content
Warren and Zoann Little Dusenbury Charity Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Warren and Zoann Little Dusenbury Charity Trust

Its FY2020 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$10M
Granted FY2020
26
Grants FY2020
8
States reached
$7.9M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2020.

Philanthropy$9.4MEducation$910kEnvironment$862kHuman Services$110kArts & Culture$106kCrime & Legal$80kHealth$60kFood & Nutrition$25kOther$0
02FY2020 · 26 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2020

  • Under $10k4 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k18 grants · $280k
  • $250k+4 grants · $10M
$15,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DUSENBURY FAMILY CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT FUND$7,918,373
THE CLEVELAND FOUNDATION$1,429,000
HAWKEN SCHOOL$370,000
WESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY$335,000
BOOK TRUST$25,000
NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR$25,000
OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL$20,000
SMITH COLLEGE$20,000
PROJECT SELF SUFFICIENCY$20,000
LEGAL AID SOCIETY OF CLEVELAND$20,000
CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY$20,000
CROSSROADS SAFE HOUSE$20,000
CONSERVANCY FOR CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK$15,000
OVARIAN CANCER RESEARCH FUND ALLIANCE$15,000
VERDE VALLEY SCHOOL$10,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY20–20, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%THE FAMILY CENTERLA FAMILIA: $10k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
NY
MA
OH
CA
CO
AZ
TN
DC
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

21%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.1M · 26 repeat orgs$8.0M to everyone else

26 repeat relationships: 18 still active in FY2020, 8 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
3

Total granted

$2.1M
$40k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+50%
+226%

Still filing today

77%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 10% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8.0M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20
EnvironmentEducationArts & CultureHousing & ShelterHuman ServicesReligionOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • HS
    HAWKEN SCHOOL
    4× · 2017–2020 · $616k · revenue +76%
  • WR
    WESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY
    3× · 2018–2020 · $519k · revenue +53%
  • BT
    BOOK TRUST
    4× · 2017–2020 · $100k · revenue +20%

Funded once

  • TF
    The Food Bank for Larimer Countygraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +45%
  • EN
    EMERALD NECKLACE ENDOWMENT FUND
    one grant, 2018 · $10k
  • CF
    COALITION FOR THE POUDRE RIVER WATERSHEDgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +226%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
West Creek Conservancy

Our mission is to enrich the lives of all people in northeast ohio by conserving natural habitats, restoring the ecological value of our region's lands and waters, and expanding opportunities to connect people from all cultures to…

Environment
2
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
3
The Clearwater Conservancy of Central Pennsylvania Inc

To conserve and restore the natural resources through land conservation, water resources stewardship and environmental outreach across central pennsylvania.

Environment
4
Texas Trees Foundation

The mission of texas trees foundation is to improve the health of cities and people through the transformative power of trees.

—
5
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
6
Claremont Lincoln University

Delivers affordable, accessible, and relevant higher education programs.

Education
7
New York League of Conservation Voters

See schedule onylcv is a non-partisan policy making and political action organization that works to make environmental protection a top priority with elected officials, decision-makers and the voters by evaluating incumbent performance and…

—
8
Western Pennsylvania Conservancy

The western pennsylvania conservancy protects and restores exceptional places to provide our region with clean waters and healthy forests, wildlife and natural areas for the benefit of present and future generations. the conservancy…

Environment
9
Property and Environment Research Center

Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.

Public Benefit
10
Federation of State Conservation Voter Leagues Dba Nj League of Cons Voters

New jersey lcv is the statewide political voice for the environment. working with our allies in the community, we advocate for strong environmental policies, support our environmental justice partners in pursuing more equitable policies,…

—
11
Native Plant Trust Inc

The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.

Environment
12
Albright College

As a diverse community of learners, we cultivate integrity, curiosity, connection and resilience.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Cleveland Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Bas Bleu Theater Company. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

28 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 28 of the 38 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
28/28
Grantees still filing
23/28
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DUSENBURY FAMILY CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT FUND: $7,918,373 · OtherDUSENBURY FAMILY CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT FUND+15 more: $305,000 · OtherTHE CLEVELAND FOUNDATION: $1,429,000 · PhilanthropyTHE CLEVELAND …THE OVARIAN CANCER RESEARCH FUND INC: $60,000 · Philanthropy+1 more: $8,000 · PhilanthropyHAWKEN SCHOOL: $616,000 · EducationBOOK TRUST: $100,000 · EducationTHE TRUSTEES OF THE SMITH COLLEGE: $82,000 · EducationCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $50,000 · Education+2 more: $30,000 · EducationWESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY: $519,000 · EnvironmentTHE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $80,000 · EnvironmentLIVING LANDS & WATERS: $60,000 · EnvironmentSHAKER LAKES REGIONAL NATURE CENTER DBA NATURE CENTER AT SHAKER LAKES: $40,000 · EnvironmentCOLORADO OPEN LANDS: $31,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVANCY FOR CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK: $30,000 · Environment+2 more: $25,000 · EnvironmentPROJECT SELF-SUFFICIENCY OF NORTHERN COLORADO: $80,000 · ReligionBas Bleu Theater Company: $40,000 · Arts & CultureOpenStage Theatre and Co Inc: $30,000 · Arts & CultureNEVADA CITY COMMUNITY BROADCAST GROUP: $10,000 · Arts & CultureNEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INC: $25,000 · Housing & Shelter
Other$8,223,373Philanthropy$1,497,000Education$878,000Environment$785,000Religion$80,000Arts & Culture$80,000Housing & Shelter$25,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE CLEVELAND FOUNDATION: $1,429,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetHAWKEN SCHOOL: $616,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetWESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY: $519,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetBOOK TRUST: $100,000 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF THE SMITH COLLEGE: $82,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetPROJECT SELF-SUFFICIENCY OF NORTHERN COLORADO: $80,000 over 4y, 1.4% of budgetTHE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $80,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetLIVING LANDS & WATERS: $60,000 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetTHE OVARIAN CANCER RESEARCH FUND INC: $60,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $50,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetLEGAL AID SOCIETY OF CLEVELAND: $40,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBas Bleu Theater Company: $40,000 over 4y, 4.3% of budgetSHAKER LAKES REGIONAL NATURE CENTER DBA NATURE CENTER AT SHAKER LAKES: $40,000 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetCOLORADO OPEN LANDS: $31,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCONSERVANCY FOR CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK: $30,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetOpenStage Theatre and Co Inc: $30,000 over 3y, 2.7% of budgetNEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetThe Food Bank for Larimer County: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS NATIONAL PARK: $22,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetLAND TRUST ALLIANCE INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCLEVELAND KIDS' BOOK BANK: $20,000 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetCROSSROADS SAFEHOUSE INC: $20,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetVERDE VALLEY SCHOOL: $14,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetNEVADA CITY COMMUNITY BROADCAST GROUP: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetTHE FAMILY CENTERLA FAMILIA: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetLAUREL SCHOOL: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCOALITION FOR THE POUDRE RIVER WATERSHED: $5,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Otter Cares Foundatio…The Cleveland Foundat…Community Foundation …The Bessemer Giving F…Colorado Gives Founda…Woodward Governor Cha…The George Gund Found…PatagoniaorgThe Food Bank for Lar…The Louise H & David …United Way of Larimer…Anschutz Family Found…
Otter Cares Foundation AKA OTTERCARES FOUNDATIONCO23.8× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Otter Cares Foundation AKA OTTERCARES FOUNDATION · The Cleveland Foundation · Community Foundation of Northern Colorado · The Bessemer Giving Fund · Colorado Gives Foundation · Woodward Governor Charitable Trust · The George Gund Foundation · Patagoniaorg · The Food Bank for Larimer County · The Louise H & David S Ingalls Fdn · United Way of Larimer County · Anschutz Family Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Warren and Zoann Little Dusenbury Charity Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Warren and Zoann Little Dusenbury Charity Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • The Trustees of the Smith College: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
11report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Warren and Zoann Little Dusenbury Charity Trust?

Find your warmest path to Warren and Zoann Little Dusenbury Charity Trust through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 38 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Warren and Zoann Little Dusenbury Charity’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home